3 ms·

The margin for any given piece of content will be low Not when the financial incentive rises the rarer (less shared) a piece of content gets. This will be

by TekMol 5y ago

The margin for any given piece of content will be low Not when the financial incentive rises the rarer (less shared) a piece of content gets. This will be baked into the protocols. Arweave already has this.

wizzwizz4 5y ago
That's not feasible either. Where does the money come from?
- TekMol 5y ago
  Where does the money to do Bitcoin mining come from? From the users who want to write to the Bitcoin blockchain. Same with the blockchains that support larger amounts of data. Whoever wants to store data pays for it. The specifics of how the storage of rare content is incentivized depends on the protocol. On Filecoin the publisher pays an ongoing fee. On Arweave it is paid upfront. The current estimate is that $10 will store a GB for 200 years. So doing a tweet on an Arweave powered social network would cost you something like $0.001 if you want your tweet to survive for 200 years.
  - wizzwizz4 5y ago
    I think you fundamentally misunderstand Bitcoin. People don't pay to store data on the blockchain; they pay to get their transactions mined. There's no guarantee that all the blocks of the Bitcoin blockchain will stick around forever, only that there'll be a consensus as to what the current block is, and what the states of all the wallets are (since that's the only information you need to validate a new block). Keeping historical blocks around is not a property of Bitcoin. No up-front blockchain payment system can keep data around for any length of time. (There is no mechanism enforcing the storage of the data; such a mechanism cannot exist within a computer system.) “$10/GB for 200 years” are the words of a snake-oil salesperson – or, more charitably, somebody who hasn't properly read the marketing copy.
    - TekMol 5y ago
      You are confusing function and implementation. Technically "get their transactions mined" is having a piece of data written to the chain. You are correct that in Bitcoin there is less incentive to store old blocks. But in chains crafted to store data for a long time there is. I am stopping this discussion here because you are too negative (almost aggressive) for my liking. But it will be an interesting thread to read again in 20 years when all this has played out.

by TekMol 5y ago

wizzwizz4 5y ago

That's not feasible either. Where does the money come from?

TekMol 5y ago
Where does the money to do Bitcoin mining come from? From the users who want to write to the Bitcoin blockchain. Same with the blockchains that support larger amounts of data. Whoever wants to store data pays for it. The specifics of how the storage of rare content is incentivized depends on the protocol. On Filecoin the publisher pays an ongoing fee. On Arweave it is paid upfront. The current estimate is that $10 will store a GB for 200 years. So doing a tweet on an Arweave powered social network would cost you something like $0.001 if you want your tweet to survive for 200 years.
- wizzwizz4 5y ago
  I think you fundamentally misunderstand Bitcoin. People don't pay to store data on the blockchain; they pay to get their transactions mined. There's no guarantee that all the blocks of the Bitcoin blockchain will stick around forever, only that there'll be a consensus as to what the current block is, and what the states of all the wallets are (since that's the only information you need to validate a new block). Keeping historical blocks around is not a property of Bitcoin. No up-front blockchain payment system can keep data around for any length of time. (There is no mechanism enforcing the storage of the data; such a mechanism cannot exist within a computer system.) “$10/GB for 200 years” are the words of a snake-oil salesperson – or, more charitably, somebody who hasn't properly read the marketing copy.
  - TekMol 5y ago
    You are confusing function and implementation. Technically "get their transactions mined" is having a piece of data written to the chain. You are correct that in Bitcoin there is less incentive to store old blocks. But in chains crafted to store data for a long time there is. I am stopping this discussion here because you are too negative (almost aggressive) for my liking. But it will be an interesting thread to read again in 20 years when all this has played out.